About your Search

20140226
20140306
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
for that in religion. we're talking about marriages, about those ceremonies that really when you participate in them as described in the package about being artistic, you're affirming of something that runs counter to your religious beliefs. >> you're saying i can't ban -- i have the bill in front of me two pages for me saying you can do this if the person's refusal to act is moat have aed by religious belief. you're saying to me if i'm -- someone could ban me from coming in if i was married to another woman but not if i was simply a lesbian and not married to the woman? it's gay marriage that's your problem? >> that is -- it sets in place this has to be a religious belief that is deeply held and you can't just come up and create a religion. you can't come up and say, i'm not going to serve somebody this food and that would be inconsistent with a christian world view. christians want to serve people. where the issue is, and this is what happened in new mexico, what drove this was that you had a christian photography if i company that was sued for not photographing a same sex wedding ceremony. that's
because of their religion so she didn't think the bill made accepts. your organization release add statement today that read "this legislation would give homosexuals more protection than they did under the current law". given nobody could come up with example of the discrimination, how could they have more protection under a law essentially created to allow people who didn't want to serve gays getting married with things like photography or wedding cakes? >> well, the irony is that arizona does not currently have sexual orientation listed as a protected category in either their employment nondiscrimination laws or public accommodation laws. so the current state of the law in arizona is that anybody can discriminate against gays at any time for any reason or for no reason whatsoever. this bill deals only with when a government action conflicts with a person's sincerely held religious belief. it requires the person asserting that right to be able to prove that this is motivated by the religious belief, that that belief is sincerely held, and that the government action is a substantia
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)